3-foot gauge in Britain

[DerekC]

Am I right in saying that the only operational 3-foot gauge railway on the British mainland is on Southend Pier? Were there once others and if so, where? The only ones I know without consulting Mr W Pedia are the Southwold and (I think) the Rye and Camber.

 

[hexagon789]

Am I right in saying that the only operational 3-foot gauge railway on the British mainland is on Southend Pier? Were there once others and if so, where? The only ones I know without consulting Mr W Pedia are the Southwold and (I think) the Rye and Camber.

I believe the Ravenglass & Eskdale was originally 3 foot. There was the Lochaber railway which ran from Fort William for a length of 15 miles, and I believe Wales had some 3 foot lines for a period.

Certainly 3 foot seems to be far more common a guage in Ireland and the Isle of Man.

 

[Calthrop]

3 ft. gauge public lines with passenger service in Great Britain: Southend aside, I know only of the Southwold and -- confirming your "thinks" -- the Rye & Camber; also, there was the Ravenglass & Eskdale before its conversion to a 15 in. gauge line in 1915. There was long some uncertainty and debate as to whether the "old" R & ER was 3 ft., or 2 ft. 9 in.; I believe it is now reckoned as certain as may be, that it was 3 ft.

There was a considerable amount of industrial 3 ft. gauge in Great Britain, some of it running appreciable distances -- don't know, though, whether that's in your sphere of interest here.

@hexagon789: mine was posted immediately following on yours, before I had a chance to read yours.

I don't recall hearing of any 3 ft. gauge in Wales; but I don't make any claim to omniscience ! Presumably any Welsh 3 ft., would have been industrial.

 

[Ploughman]

Looked at Wiki for industrial narrow gauge and some 3ft lines are listed.
A number of power stations, Gas works in the South East.
Also some timber lines in Scotland. Most to do with wartime Ministry of Supply.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The Redlake Tramway in Devon, running from above the GWR main-line at Bittaford (and connected to it by aerial cableway) to the Redlake China Clay Works on Dartmoor was 3ft gauge. It had a passenger coach for conveyance of workers to the site. Kerr Stuart had to modify their 'standard' 3ft 6in design of loco to accomodate this unusual choice (for Britain) of gauge.

http://ivybridge-heritage.org/redlake-tramway/

 

[Calthrop]

Other specifics re 3 ft. gauge industrial lines in Great Britain: some East Midlands ironstone lines were of this gauge -- for instance, at Kettering; and at Eastwell near Melton Mowbray (unexpectedly, the metre gauge showed up too, at more than one location on the East Midlands ironstone scene).

The Torrington & Marland clay line in Devon was 3 ft. gauge, until superseded by the Southern Railway's new Torrington -- Halwill standard-gauge public line in 1925.

There was a physically isolated 3 ft. gauge line just north of Aberdeen, serving a brick and tile works and -- first concurrently, then (after end of brick-and-tile business) solely -- passenger-wise, a local golf club. A quite recent thread on this sub-forum, started by myself, re this line:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/isolated-narrow-gauge-line-new-to-me-any-information.178128/

 

[krus_aragon]

I don't recall hearing of any 3 ft. gauge in Wales; but I don't make any claim to omniscience ! Presumably any Welsh 3 ft., would have been industrial.

The only 3ft gauge in North Wales that I can think of is the Gorseddau tramway, before it was relaid to match that of the Croesor tramway (and the Ffestiniog). Wikipedia says it had a horse-drawn passenger carriage built by Boston Lodge, but is unclear what the gauge was.

 

[Indigo Soup]

Looked at Wiki for industrial narrow gauge and some 3ft lines are listed.
A number of power stations, Gas works in the South East.
Also some timber lines in Scotland. Most to do with wartime Ministry of Supply.

I believe that 3-foot gauge was quite a common choice for contractors' railways on large construction projects. As a result, many standard gauge railways were originally laid in 3-foot gauge!

There was also a proposal in 1869 for a 3-foot gauge railway, to be worked by Fairlie locomotives, from Alyth to Braemar over the Spittal of Glenshee. I'm surprised that more wasn't made of narrow gauge in Scotland, given similarities to the rural districts of Ireland.

 

[Catracho]

There was also a proposal in 1869 for a 3-foot gauge railway, to be worked by Fairlie locomotives, from Alyth to Braemar over the Spittal of Glenshee. I'm surprised that more wasn't made of narrow gauge in Scotland, given similarities to the rural districts of Ireland.

Sounds interesting. Do you have any more information about it?

 

[Indigo Soup]

Sounds interesting. Do you have any more information about it?

Only this thread from RMweb:
https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/i...cottish-narrow-gauge-railway-in-3-foot-gauge/

 

[Calthrop]

There was also a proposal in 1869 for a 3-foot gauge railway, to be worked by Fairlie locomotives, from Alyth to Braemar over the Spittal of Glenshee. I'm surprised that more wasn't made of narrow gauge in Scotland, given similarities to the rural districts of Ireland.

Looking at how things went in Wales, Ireland and the IOM; I've always felt surprised at the least, that Scotland's only true public narrow-gauge railway turned out to be the freakish, physically isolated, and geographically very remote Campbeltown & Machrihanish. A quirk of how things happened to work out historically, I suppose -- they might easily have been very different.

 

[randyrippley]

a 3' network was used in the construction of Stocks reservoir in the middle of Bowland

there's a pictoral history at http://www.dalehead.org/construction.htm

some more modern photos at https://www.28dayslater.co.uk/threads/the-stocks-reservoir-railway-july-1977.52921/
last time I went that way the steam crane was still there, along with the hanging track

 

[341o2]

The Torrington & Marland clay line in Devon was 3 ft. gauge, until superseded by the Southern Railway's new Torrington -- Halwill standard-gauge public line in 1925.

May I add that the 3' gauge system continued in use bringing clay to the exchange sidings with the s/g railway until 1970

 

[341o2]

The deep mine funicular at Llechwedd is 3'0

 

[Calthrop]

May I add that the 3' gauge system continued in use bringing clay to the exchange sidings with the s/g railway until 1970

Lasting till interestingly late ! (If I'd ever known about this long survival, I'd forgotten.)

I have a fondness for railway-related "what-if" fantasising; am musing on how it could have been interesting if the rather ludicrous Torrington -- Halwill standard-gauge branch, very "late to the party" and borderline under-used / ignored by passengers, had never come to be; and the clay had continued to be brought out to Torrrington by narrow gauge, and transferred there. The 3 ft. system might have lasted long enough to become a preserved / heritage outfit...

 

[Struner]

Sounds interesting. Do you have any more information about it?

& there is this as well: http://www.perthshirediary.com/html/day0528.html

 

[DerekC]

Thanks for all this interesting material. Picking up @Calthrop 's point about Scotland, it's interesting how secondary railways in Ireland were constructed on 3 foot gauge in a big way, but this never caught on in Scotland. If it had, the West Highland, Kyle of Lochalsh and Inverness to Thurso lines might have been 3 foot!

 

[Indigo Soup]

If it had, the West Highland, Kyle of Lochalsh and Inverness to Thurso lines might have been 3 foot!

The Duke of Sutherland - who bankrolled much of the railway network north of Inverness - wished that he'd known about narrow gauge sooner, as he could have made a return on his investment rather than a loss. In promoting the Kyle line, 3' 6" gauge was considered, and was reckoned to be about two-thirds the cost of standard gauge, but would have forced a break of gauge at Dingwall.

I once estimated that all of the Highland Railway's proposed lines north of Inverness could have been constructed in 3-foot gauge for the same cost as the standard gauge lines that were actually built.

 

[Journeyman]

Thanks for all this interesting material. Picking up @Calthrop 's point about Scotland, it's interesting how secondary railways in Ireland were constructed on 3 foot gauge in a big way, but this never caught on in Scotland. If it had, the West Highland, Kyle of Lochalsh and Inverness to Thurso lines might have been 3 foot!

Just as well they weren't, as I suspect they'd have closed many, many years ago if they had been.

 

[Calthrop]

Inverness to Wick / Thurso was found invaluable in World War I for supplying equipment / fuel / people to the Royal Navy's facilities at Invergordon and in the Orkneys -- carried a huge amount of such traffic during the conflict. If that route had begun its life as narrow gauge, I'd envisage enforced urgent standard-gauging as soon as the war was under way; or possibly conversion to standard gauge, promulgated by the highest authority, at some time pre-1914 -- given apprehension at high levels, about the likelihood of war with Germany.

 

[Struner]

Inverness to Wick / Thurso was found invaluable in World War I for supplying equipment / fuel / people to the Royal Navy's facilities at Invergordon and in the Orkneys -- carried a huge amount of such traffic during the conflict. [...]

& in WW2 as well of course, certainly for Orkney/Scapa Flow - & not the Orkneys, thank you.

 

[Calthrop]

Higgerant Saxon begs forgiveness ...

 

[edwin_m]

The Duke of Sutherland - who bankrolled much of the railway network north of Inverness - wished that he'd known about narrow gauge sooner, as he could have made a return on his investment rather than a loss. In promoting the Kyle line, 3' 6" gauge was considered, and was reckoned to be about two-thirds the cost of standard gauge, but would have forced a break of gauge at Dingwall.

I once estimated that all of the Highland Railway's proposed lines north of Inverness could have been constructed in 3-foot gauge for the same cost as the standard gauge lines that were actually built.

It would be interesting to know the reasoning behind this. Apart from a slightly narrower formation and obvious things like shorter sleepers, the cost savings of a narrow gauge railway must come from being able to build tighter curves and thus to get around various obstacles with less civil engineering than going through or over them. Many narrow gauge railways have more severe gradients, but that's because the need to construct cheaply in difficult terrain was a reason both to have steep gradients and to have narrow gauge, not because narrow gauge is intrinsically more able to cope with severe gradients. So it's not legitimate to count the cost saving arising from steeper gradients as a benefit of narrow gauge.

 

[Struner]

Higgerant Saxon begs forgiveness ...

 

[Indigo Soup]

Apart from a slightly narrower formation and obvious things like shorter sleepers, the cost savings of a narrow gauge railway must come from being able to build tighter curves and thus to get around various obstacles with less civil engineering than going through or over them.

I believe that is indeed part of the logic; part of the claim is also based on narrow gauge locomotives and rolling stock being more lightly constructed, and therefore needing lighter rails, less ballast etc. If you want the full logic, as espoused by Robert Fairlie himself, and have time to plough through 200 pages of Victorian polemic prose, see below:
https://archive.org/details/railwaysornorai01fairgoog

Going even smaller, Everard Calthrop claimed that his pet 2' 6" gauge lines could be constructed for one-quarter the cost per mile of 4' 8.5" gauge, and gave the best ratio of capital cost to capacity. It was this gauge that the Rural Transport (Scotland) Committee of 1919 preferred for new narrow-gauge light railways.

 

[Catracho]

Inverness to Wick / Thurso was found invaluable in World War I for supplying equipment / fuel / people to the Royal Navy's facilities at Invergordon and in the Orkneys -- carried a huge amount of such traffic during the conflict.

Question: was that really the case? I know of the "Naval Specials" carrying personnel that ran to/from Thurso, but I was always under the impression that the famous "Jellicoe Specials" carrying the coal for the Grand Fleet never actually ventured that far north and instead ran to places like Grangemouth or Rosyth (where the coal was then transferred onto ships for the rest of the journey to Scapa Flow). And that made sense to me, because if these trains actually did run to Thurso/Wick, how did they transfer the coal, seeing that neither harbour has/had rail access or tipping facilities.

 

[randyrippley]

Question: was that really the case? I know of the "Naval Specials" carrying personnel that ran to/from Thurso, but I was always under the impression that the famous "Jellicoe Specials" carrying the coal for the Grand Fleet never actually ventured that far north and instead ran to places like Grangemouth or Rosyth (where the coal was then transferred onto ships for the rest of the journey to Scapa Flow). And that made sense to me, because if these trains actually did run to Thurso/Wick, how did they transfer the coal, seeing that neither harbour has/had rail access or tipping facilities.

this ten year old thread is worth reading

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/136303-oil-fuel-jellicoe-specials/
this is the critical post by "Gibbo"

There were still a large number of coal fired battleships with the Grand Fleet at the end of the war. The Grand Fleet's need for oil grew sharply over the war but it still used a lot of coal. The figures below are taken from an article titled 'British Naval Operational Logistics, 1914-1918' by Jon Tetsuro Sumida in The Journal of Military History, vol. 57, no. 3 (July 1993).

Maximum Fuel Capacity of Major Warships of the Grand Fleet (tons).

Date Aug-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18

Coal 136,798 149,869 155,864 127,139 123,850

Oil 47,141 61,141 90,577 132,015 152,982

In 1917, tanker losses led to an oil shortage, which required oil fired ships to restrict their fuel consumption and thus their speed. When a squadron of US dreadnoughts was sent to join the Grand Fleet the British specifically asked that it be comprised of coal burners.

On the subject of transportation of supplies, Sumida says that in the first 5 months of the war, fuel, supplies and personnel were sent by rail to Dingwall and shortly afterwards Scrabster through Thurso. Inadequate port and rail facilities at these places meant that from January 1915 naval, ordnance (other than ammunition) and medical supplies were sent by rail to Aberdeen and then by sea to Scapa. Dingwall was dropped and Thurso-Scrabster used just for personnel along with Inverness, which was also used for mail and ammunition. Ammunition was also sent via Grangemouth from March 1915. Food went directly from southern victualling yards by sea until 1916, when it started to go to Aberdeen and Grangemouth by rail.

In the first year of the war, coal was sent by rail to Glasgow and Grangemouth but from autumn 1915 it either went directly by sea from South Wales or to Grangemouth by rail. Oil arrived at Glasgow from overseas and was then sent by canal to Grangemouth, and then by sea to Invergordon. The canal was replaced by a pipeline in late 1918.

other posts in the thread indicate the main coal source was the South Wales anthracite mines

 

[Struner]

this ten year old thread is worth reading

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/136303-oil-fuel-jellicoe-specials/
this is the critical post by "Gibbo"

other posts in the thread indicate the main coal source was the South Wales anthracite mines

There was the Jellicoe Express, a daily "passenger" train for naval personnel, London-Thurso. But the Jellicoe Special, the coaltrain ran to Grangemouth or sometimes to Rosyth. But there was plenty war-related goods traffic on the Far North line as well - coal for the fishing boats, all sorts of equipment for the naval dockyard at Invergordon, timber going South etc.

 

[Calthrop]

this ten year old thread is worth reading
https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/136303-oil-fuel-jellicoe-specials/
this is the critical post by "Gibbo"
other posts in the thread indicate the main coal source was the South Wales anthracite mines

Many dauntingly erudite people on this Great War Forum -- including in the linked-to thread above !

I hadn't known the details about the "Jellicoe Specials" coal workings at their northern end; but had the general impression of having read via a number of sources, that the Far North line was -- especially with its being basically single track -- under heavy pressure in the World Wars, particularly the First -- @Struner confirming here.

There was the Jellicoe Express, a daily "passenger" train for naval personnel, London - Thurso. But the Jellicoe Special, the coaltrain ran to Grangemouth or sometimes to Rosyth. But there was plenty war-related goods traffic on the Far North line as well - coal for the fishing boats, all sorts of equipment for the naval dockyard at Invergordon, timber going South etc.

My bolding: I gather that a favourite name for this working, current among said long-suffering naval personnel, was "the Misery".

 

[Struner]

The Misery indeed! It seems there weren't many toilets...